Honble Supreme Court in Rajesh Kumar-Daia vs Rajasthan Public Seruice Commission I stating AS

G.O.Ms.No.35 Date 13.O2.2024. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the impugned memo No.353/RP-ll/2022 Dated O6.O4.2O24 and consequently direct the respondent to publish forthwith the final selection list of Assistant Professor in Forest College and Research lnstitute pursuant to vide Notifi cation No. 1Ol2O22 daled 22.08.2022. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI RAMESH CHILLA Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR SERVICES - | Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI P.S. RAJASHEKAR, S.C. FOR TGPSC The Court made the following: ORDER I THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVITRAPU RAJESHWAR RAO WRIT PETITION No.11342 of 2O24 ORDER: This writ petition is hled challenging Memo No.353/RP-II/2O22, dated 06.O4.2O24 issued by the 2"d respondent.

2. Heard Sri Ramesh Chilla, learned counsel for the petitioner ald Sri P. S. Rajashekar, learned Standing Counsel for the Telangana State Public Service Commission (TGPSC)-2.a respondent.

3. The present writ petition was filed by four petitioners. Subsequently, three petitioners i.e., petitioner Nos.2 to 4 withdrew the writ petition by order 17.O2.2O25. 2 E

4. Brief facts of the case are as follows :- (a) The TGPSC issued Notification No.lOl2O22 dated 22.08.2022, for recruitment of two Professors, four Associate Professors and 2l Assistant Professors in the 3d respondent Institute. The petitioner, having acquired M.Tech in Computer Science, applied for the post of Assistant Professor in Computer Science/Information Technolory. The selection process did not involve a examination. It required submission of online applications, proof of qualihcations and experience, assessment academic and research performance, achievement of mlnlmum research scores and participation in an 'Interview- cum-Demo' held on 30.0 i.2023 (b) The Schedule of Intervieu,-cum-Demo for the posts of Associate Professors and Assistant Professors was released on 01.02.2023. The interviews were ,.A conducted from 06.02.2023 to O8.O2.2O23, and the 3 petitioner attended as per the schedule. (c) Based on the interview-cum-demo, tl:e marks list of caldidates was released by the 2na respondent on 15.02.2023. The petitioner secured 1"t rank by scoring 76.900 marks in the Computer Science/Information Technolory. However, even after more than thirteen months. no final selection list was published for reasons best known to the respondents. Meanwhile, the Government of Telangana issued Memo No. 7593 / Se r.D / A2 I 2022, dated 02. 12.2022, outlining the methodolog, for implementation of horizontal reservation for woman in line with the judgment of the Honble Supreme Court in Rajesh Kumar-Daia Vs. Rajasthan Public Seruice Commission I stating AS follows:-. ". . . is informed that 33 1/ 3o/o reseruation for women, in all categoies, in tLe matter of direct t (2007 (8) scc 78s) I I 4 recruitment to tle posts, for tuhicll men and u)omen are equallg suited shall be implemented horizantallg, follouing tle laut laid doun by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of RaJesh Kumar-Darla V Rqiasthz;n htblic Serutce Commission.

5. The 2"d respondent-Commission has issued a Web Note, dated 14.O7.2023, which reads as follows:- 'It is hereby informed that, in compliance of orders of tle Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajesh-Kumar Daria Vs. Rajasthan Publb Service Commission (1 supra) and interim orders of the Hon'ble High Court in related matters in uaious the Gouemment Memo W.Ps and No.7593/ *r.D/ A2/ 2022, dated O2. 1 2.2022 of the General Administmtion lrSER.Di Department; Telangana, the Commi.ssion has decided to implem.ent tte Horizontal Reseruatron for Women candidates in all categoies in the matter of direct requitm.ent for all the examinatiorts which are conducted bg tle TSPSC afier issuattce of *e Memo. Tte seledions shall be subject to the outcome of final orders of tle Hon'ble High Court ir the related matter,' ;1 )

6. The TGPSC has decided to implement horizontal reservation for women candidates in all categories in the matters of direct recruitment for all the examinations which are conducted by it after issuance of the Memo. No Writ Petitions are pending with respect to the recruitment of Professors, Associate Professors, and Assistant Prolessors in Forest College and Research Institute, Mulugu, regarding Notification No.LO / 2022, dated 22.08.2022.

7. The Government of Telangana issued G.O.Ms.No.3, dated 1O.O2.2O24, citing the judgment of the Apex Court and the orders of this Court in W.P.Nos.385O2 of 2022 and 27844 of 2022 stating as follows :- "7. Gouentment after careful examination, haue decided to implement 33 1/3 ot' reseruation in fauour of u)omen horizontcrllg tuithout earmarking ang roster points for tLem, in each category i.e. OC, BC-A, BC-g, BC-C, BC.D, BC-D, EWS, SC, 54 () Phgsicallg Handicapped, Ex-seruiemen and Meritorious sporrspersons, in tle matter of direct recruitment to the posts for which both men and u)omen dre eEiallA suited, in supersession of tLe orders issued uide referenes 3 and 4th read aboue." All the Rea uitment agencies under the Gouernment, Govemm.ent Undertakings, Quasi- gouernment institutions, including Gouemment aided institufions and Local bodies, are directed to implement tle reservation in fovour of women acordinglg."

8. The Hon'ble Apex Court has ruled that a goverrrment order can be applied retrospectively il it clarifies an ea.rlier order. However, if the order modilies or €unends the earlier order, it must be applied prospectively because applying thc retrospectively wotrld withdraw vested rights, which is not permitted under law. Any Government Order should be implemented prospectively and not retrospectively and the same was clearly mentioned in ar\ 7 the recent judgment of the Kerala High Court in W.P.(C).No. 30646 of 2023 stating as follows :- "It is a uell-acepted pinciple of mnstruction that a statutory rule or Gouernnlpnt Order is prospedbe in nahre unless it is expressly or by ne@ssc:ry implication made to haue retrospectiue effect. Wlere proceedings are initiated for selection bg issuing an aduertisement, tte selection should normallg be reguloted bg tLe tlen-existing rules and Gouernm.ent Orders, and any amendment of th.e rules or tLe Gouernment Order pending the selection slrcuW not affed the ualidity of tlrc selection made by tte Seleding Authoitg or the Public Seruice Commission unless ttre omended Rules or th.e amended Gouernnlent Orders issued in exerci.se of its statutory pou;er either by express prouision or bg neessary Intendment indicate that amended Rules shall be applicable to the pending selections. See P. Mohendran u. State of Kamataka [1990 (1) SCC 4111."

9. Even if the Government of Telangana chooses to enforce G.O.M.No.3 dated 10.02.2024, it should be implemented from the date ol its issuance, without retrospective effect, and it is illegal, arbitrar5r, i 8 discriminatory, and against tJle judgments of Hon'ble Apex Court and Articles 14, L6, 19(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India, if any attempt to irnplement it retrospectively.

10. Aggrieved by the action of the 2"a respondent, the petitioner herein filed W.P.No.694L of 2024 and this Court pleased to pass the following order :- "To consi.der the representation of the petitioner dated 28.1O.2023 and pass appropriate order, strictlg in a.wrdane with lana and expedttiouslg as possible, prefera.blg utithin a peiod of three uteeks from tte date of reeipt of a apg of this order and communicate a @pA th.ereof to the petitioners" . I 1. The 2nd respondent as part of compliance with the order passed by this Court, informed the petitioner through Memo No.35 3 / RP -ll I 2022, dated 06.04.2024 . stating thzrt the Government of Telangana issued a Memo vide Govt., Memo No.4981/Ser.D/A2/2O23, ,q 9 GAD (Ser.D), dated O1.02.2024, and subsequently issued G.O.Ms.No.3, dated 1O.O4.2024, and G.O.Ms.No.35, dated 13.O2.2O24 for implementation of horizontal reservation for all ongoing recruitments. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is Iiled.

12. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that appropriate orders be passed in the writ petition by setting aside the impugned Memo dated

06.04.2024 ald direct the 2"d respondent to publish the final selection list of Assistant Professor in Forest College and Research Institute, pursuant to Notification No.lO I 2022, dated 22.08.2022.

13. The 2"d respondent has filed a counter aflidavit stating that TGPSC issued Notification No.lO/2O22, dated 22.08.2022 proposing to filI up 27 vacancies to the post of Professors, Associate Professors and I I I l0 Assistant Professors in Forest College and Research Institute, Mulugu, in the State of Telangana.

14. The petitioner has earlier hled W.P.No.694l of 2024 questioning the action of TSPSC in not declaring the hnal selection list of Assistant Professors in Forest College and Research Institute, despite completion of the recruitment process more than a year ago without assigning reasons. This Court disposed of the said writ petition directing the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 28. 1O.2023 and pass appropriate orders, strictly in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three (03) weeks from the date of receipt a copy of this order and communicate a copy thereof to the petitioner.

15. In compliance of the above order of this Court, the petitioner was issued speaking order vide Memo i I 1 /\ No.353/RP-lIl2022, 06.04.2024, wherein the petitioner was informed that after receiving the revised indents from ttre Forest College and Research Institute, Mulugu, further process of recruitment would be initiated. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

16. In WP Nos.385O2 atd 27844 of 2022, this Court has issued directions to the respondent Commission to restrict the women's reservation to 33 1/3 percent by following the principle of Horizontal reservation within vertical reservation in terms of the judgments rende red by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rojesh Kumar Daria (1 supra). Consequenfly, in complialce with the orders of this Court in W.P.Nos.27844 of 2022 and 38502 ol 2022, tJre Dept., for Welfare of Women, Children, Disabled and Senior Citiz,ert (Prog-l) has issued G.O.Ms.No.3, dated LO.O2.2O24 to follow the principle of Horizontal reservation for women t2 candidates without earmarking any roster points for them and subsequently Rule 22 of State and Sub- ordinate Service Rules-1996 was amended vide G.O.Ms.No.35, General Administration (Ser. D) Dept., dated 13.02.2024, by removing the Roster points earmarked lor Women.

17. Accordingly, as per G.O.Ms.No.3, dated

70.O2.2024 and G.O.Ms.No.35, dated L3.O2.2024, giving effect to changes thereof in Rule 22 and 22-A of Telangana State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1996, the Commission would implement the Horizontal Reservation for Women candidates in the matter of direct recruitment about to the subject Noffication. The TGPSC strictly observes Rule 22 of the Telangana State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1996, while implementing the Rule of reservation for various communities/categories at the time of fiIling up of vacancies in multiple. recruitments. n l3

18. The Web Note dated 27.06.2024 was issued giving effect to G.O.Ms.No.3, dated 1O.O2.2O24 and G.O.Ms.No.35, dated I3.O2.2O24, which propagates the revised changes in the reservation policy for women stating that posts under direct recruitment shall be hlled up in a horizontal reservatjon arrangement, is clearly a clari{ication to the subject Notification. It is not ultra vires in any manner, as it has only revised the reservation policy regarding women, which ought to be implemented in accordance with the horizonta,l reservation principle, keeping the overall reservation percentage intact, i.e., up to 33.33 percent reservation in favour of women candidates. Since the web note dated 27.06.2024 served as a clarihcation to the subject notification, it is wittrin the law laid down to have applicability over the preceding t4 selection process in recruitment of the subject notification. i9. In Sree Srrnkaracharya Uniuersity of Sanskrit u. Menu2, the Apex Court held that if a subsequent Governmenl Order is declared to be a clarifrcation of the earlier order, it may be made applicable retrospectively. Therefore, the writ petition is devoid of merits and the same is liable to be dismissed.

20. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents submits that there are no merits in the writ petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. 2L. The present writ petition ls hled aggrieved by the action of the 2n(r respondent in issuing the impugned Memo datecl 06 04.2024 by stating that G.O.Ms.No.3, dated 1O.O4.2024 and G.O.Ms.No.3S, dated

13.02.2024 were issued for ttre implementation of '(2023 SCC Online SC 640) I I l5 T horZontal reservation. Petitioner's contention is that issuance of these GOs., after the publication of final marks for the hna-l selection list of Assistant Professors in Forest College and Research Institute, Mulugu, pursuant to Notihcation No.LOl22, dated 22.08.2022, is illegal and arbitraqr. The contention of tJre petitioner is that new GOs. were issued by the authorities taking their own decision. But, the said contention is not correct. The authorities have issued these two GOs., only with the directions of this Court in W.P.Nos.385O2 and 27844 of 2022 as in the said writ petitions, this Court has issued direction to the respondent Commission to restrict the women reservation to 33 I l3 percentage by following the principle of horizonta-l reservation within verLical reservation in terms of the judgments rendered by the Honble Supreme Court in the case of Rqjesh Kumar l6 Daria (l supra) and also in G.O.Ms.No.3, dated 7O.2.2O24, wherein paras 3 and 4 read as follows :-

3. The Hon'ble Su.preme Court of India teld tn the case of Rajesh Kumar Daia Vs. Rajastlnn htblic *ruie'Commission [2OO7(8) SCC 7851 that, 'social reseruations in fauour of SC, SI ond OBC under Arttcle 16(4) are 'uerticol reseruations'. Special reseruations in fauour of phgsically Landicapped, women, etc., under Artiele 16 (1) or 15 (3) are 'larizantal reseruations'. Wlrcre a uertical resentation i.s made in fauour of a Backutard Closs under Article 16 (4), the candidates Delonging to such Backward Class, mag (nmpete for non-reserued posts and if tleg are appointed to th.e non-reserued posts on tleir oum m.erit, ttrcir number will not be counted against the quota reserued for tlte respective Backward Class. Tlerefore, if the number of SC candidates, who bg their oun mei| get selected to open competition uacancies, equals or euen exceeds the percentage of posts reserued for SC candidates, it cannot be said tlwt the reseruation quota for SCs stood filled. Ttrc entire reseruation quota will be intact and auailable in ad.dition to those selected under open competition category. htt tLLe said-pinciple applicable to uertical (social) reseruations, u.till not applg to hori.zontal (special) reseruations. Where a special reseruation for f-r t7 women i.s prouided uithin the social reseruations for SCs, the proper procedure i-s frrst to filt up the qtota /or SCs in order of meit and then find out the number of candidates among them who belong to tle special reseruation group of 'Scheduled Caste Wom.en'. If the number of utomen in such list b equol to or more tltan the number of special reseruation qtota, then tlrcre i.s no need for further selection touards ttle special resen-tation quotd. OnlA if tlrcre is ang sLartfall, the requisite number of Scheduled Caste Women shall haue to be taken by deleting the otresponding number of candidates from the bottom of tLE list relatirLg to Scheduled Castes. The same uieu was taken by tle Apex Courl in its judgm-ent in Public Seruice Commission, Uttaranchal Vs. Mamta Bi,sht [201o (2) scc 204].

4. In the Gouernment Memo. 7th read. aboue, it uas clarified to the Secretary, TelarLgana State htblb Seruice Commission that 33o/o ok reseruation for u)omen in all categoies in the matter of direct recntitment to the posts for uthiclt" both men and u)omen are equallg sulted, shall be implem-ented trorizontallg, follouing the la u.t laid doun bg tle Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajesh Kumar Daia Vs. Rajasthan Public Serui<:e Commi-ssion and the orders in tlrc reference 6th read. aboue. The Hon'ble High Court in its order dated 14.1O.2022 In I I I l8 W.P.No.385O2 of 2O22, directed to folloto tle pinciple of lorizontal reseruation for uomen candidates wittwut danmarking anA roster points for them, with tle folloutng obseruations : 'This Court taking into con sideration, the laut laid doun by the Apex Court in tle case of Rajesh Kumar Daria Vs. Rajasthan Public Serui@ Commi.ssion and others reported in (AIR 2007 SUPREME COURT P9.3127) and also tle earlier interim orders of this Court dated 23.O9.2O22 passed in W.P.No.27844 of 2O22, direds tLe respondents to follou the decbion of tle Hon'ble Supreme Court in tle case b7 Rajesh Kumar Daia Vs. Rajasthan Public Servie Commission and otlers u.thile makittg appointments in Group-l Seruices and to follout tle pinciples of Horizontal Reseruation for Women Candidates without earm-arking ang roster points for them".

22. In view of the above observation, the contention of the petitioner cannot be considered, as the authorities have issued the above mentioned two GOs., only with the directions of the Honble Supreme Court I i and the said direction was also followed by this Court. 19 Therefore, the same cannot be treated as illegal and arbitrary. Hence, there are no merits in the writ l petition and the same is liable to be dismissed'

29. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed' No order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// d/. P.C.SULEKHA DEVI ISTANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER To One fair copy to the HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARIpU RAJESHWAR RAO (For His Lordship's Kind Perusal)

1. 11 L.R. Copies. 2. The Under Secretary, Union of lndia, Ministry of Law, Justice and Company Affairs, New Delhi.

3. The Secretary, Telangana Advocates Association Library, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad

4. The Principal Secretary, Environment, Foresls, Science and Technology, State of Telangana, Dr. BR Ambedkar Telangana Secretariat - Hyderabad - 500022.

5. The Secretary, Telangana State Public Service Commission (TSPSC), Prathibha Bhavan, M.J. Road, Nampally, Hyderabad - 500103

6. The Registrar, Forest College & Research lnstitute, (FCRI), Mulugu, Siddipet Rd, Hyderabad, Telangana - 502279

7. One CC to SRI RAMESH CHILLA, Advocate [OPUCI 8. Two CCs to GP for Services-|, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUTI

9. One CC to SRI P.S. RAJASHEKAR, S.C. foTTGPSC [OPUC] 10.Two CD Copies MP ?.^c,. HIGH COURT DATED:0711012025 i';:; ,1tt''c-'5r4 o L) 2 B JAN 2026 (, t li--,. .". . i:.--'r ORDER WP.No.11342 of 2024 DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS ,'7-\ ?M/, )P\' \,-t